Re: [newtrk] Reviewing state of PS and DS standards

[Margaret Wasserman <margaret at thingmagic.com>]

Just for the record.  I am completely unconvinced that doing this  
review is actually useful...

Even if we move documents to historic, that doesn't remove their code- 
point assignments or stop people from using them.

My hope would be that if we push on the IESG to actually follow these  
rules, that will give us at least one group of 15 people with some  
motivation to change RFC 2026 to reflect what we've been doing for  
the past ~10 years.  I think that most of the IETF is unaware of this  
requirement in RFC 2026 and doesn't care one way or the other whether  
the IESG periodically reviews our PS documents.

I don't actually think that we need a WG to consider whether a change  
is needed to fix this, though.  So, this isn't an argument against  
shutting down newtrk.

Margaret


.
newtrk resources:_____________________________________________________
web user interface: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk.html
mhonarc archive: http://darkwing.uoregon.edu/~llynch/newtrk/index.html